Michael Kay wrote:
Yes, but I think that in any language, you can't expect a type
to be a completely precise assertion about the set of values that
you will accept.
For example, in Java, you can't say "I will accept an Integer or
a String".
But there are a lot of stuff in Java I don't want in XSLT ;-) And
why not, it could be useful, maybe?
You have to declare your type as the nearest named type in your
type hierarchy, and rely on explicit parameter validation to
make a more precise test.
That's not how I see it for XSLT, but ok, that's consistent.
I don't think that arguments about the economics of purchasing
the software are likely to carry much weight.
PS: That's certainly not an argument of mine. I am convinced the
purchase is worth its price. But anyway, there could be several
reasons for SA to be not available.
Regards,
--
Florent Georges
http://www.fgeorges.org/
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--